Search

Background: Allergic rhinitis (AR) is a common condition that is frequently associated with atopic inferior turbinate hypertrophy (ITH) resulting in nasal obstruction. Current guidelines support the use of subcutaneous allergen immunotherapy (SCIT) when patients fail pharmacologic management. However, there is a lack of consensus regarding the role of inferior turbinate reduction (ITR), a treatment that we hypothesize is cost‐effective compared with other available treatments. Methods: We conducted a cost‐effectiveness analysis comparing the following treatment combinations over a 5‐year time horizon for AR patients presenting with atopic nasal obstruction who fail initial pharmacotherapy: (1) continued pharmacotherapy alone, (2) allergy testing and SCIT, (3) allergy testing and SCIT and then ITR for SCIT nonresponders, and (4) ITR and then allergy testing and SCIT for ITR nonresponders. Results were reported as incremental cost‐effectiveness ratios (ICERs). Results: For patients who fail initial pharmacotherapy, prioritizing ITR, either by microdebrider‐assisting submucous resection or radiofrequency ablation, before SCIT was the most cost‐effective strategy. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis demonstrated that prioritizing ITR before SCIT was the most cost‐effective option in 95.4% of scenarios. ITR remained cost‐effective even with the addition of concurrent septoplasty. Conclusion: For many AR patients who present with nasal obstruction secondary to atopic inferior turbinate hypertrophy that is persistent despite pharmacotherapy, ITR is a cost‐effective treatment that should be considered prior to immunotherapy. Level of Evidence: NA – Laryngoscope, 2023 Laryngoscope, 134:1572–1580, 2024 [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses the benefits and evolving understanding of inferior turbinate reduction (ITR) as a treatment for allergic rhinitis (AR). It highlights that ITR can improve symptoms such as sneezing and rhinorrhea, and that it may also have a beneficial effect on nonallergic rhinitis. The article suggests that ITR could be considered as an upfront or concurrent treatment with allergen immunotherapy (AIT), as it offers more immediate effects and may be beneficial for patients who are not candidates for AIT. The article also mentions that societal factors and testing such as acoustic rhinometry are not typically considered in the decision to proceed with ITR. [Extracted from the article]

Objective: Both endoscopic sinus surgery (ESS) and biologic therapies have shown effectiveness for medically-refractory chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNP) without severe asthma. The objective was to evaluate cost-effectiveness of dupilumab versus ESS for patients with CRSwNP.Study Design: Cohort-style Markov decision-tree economic model with a 36-year time horizon.Methods: A cohort of 197 CRSwNP patients who underwent ESS were compared with a matched cohort of 293 CRSwNP patients from the SINUS-24 and SINUS-52 Phase 3 studies who underwent treatment with dupilumab 300 mg every 2 weeks. Utility scores were calculated from the SNOT-22 instrument in both cohorts. Decision-tree analysis and a 10-state Markov model utilized published event probabilities and primary data to calculate long-term costs and utility. The primary outcome measure was incremental cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY), which is expressed as an Incremental Cost Effectiveness Ratio. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed.Results: The ESS strategy cost $50,436.99 and produced 9.80 QALYs. The dupilumab treatment strategy cost $536,420.22 and produced 8.95 QALYs. Because dupilumab treatment was more costly and less effective than the ESS strategy, it is dominated by ESS in the base case. One-way sensitivity analyses showed ESS to be cost-effective versus dupilumab regardless of the frequency of revision surgery and at any yearly cost of dupilumab above $855.Conclusions: The ESS treatment strategy is more cost effective than dupilumab for upfront treatment of CRSwNP. More studies are needed to isolate potential phenotypes or endotypes that will benefit most from dupilumab in a cost-effective manner.Level Of Evidence: 2C Laryngoscope, 131:E26-E33, 2021. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective  To identify perioperative factors that may predict postoperative cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) leak and meningitis following expanded endoscopic transsphenoidal surgery (EETS). Study Design  This is a retrospective study. This study was set at the Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles. A total of 78 patients who underwent EETS between January 2007 and November 2018 were participated. The main outcome measures were CSF leak and meningitis. Results  A total of 78 patients underwent a total of 100 EETS procedures; 17.9 and 10.3% of patients developed postoperative CSF leaks and meningitis, respectively. Out of eight, three patients with meningitis did not develop an observable CSF leak. The risk of developing meningitis in patients with a CSF leak was significantly higher than those without a leak, with an odds ratio (OR) of 11.48 (95% confidence interval, 2.33–56.47; p  = 0.004). Pituicytomas were significantly associated with meningitis compared with other pathologies. No other patient-specific factors were identified as risks for leak or meningitis, including method of skull base repair, sex, tumor volume, or body mass index, although there was a strong trend toward reduced CSF leak rates in patient with nasoseptal flaps used for skull base repair, compared with those without (9.5 vs. 25%). CSF protein was consistently elevated on the first CSF values obtained when meningitis was suspected. Conclusion  CSF leak and meningitis are common complications of expanded endonasal surgery No statistically significant risk factors for developing a postoperative leak other than the pathology of pituicytoma were identified, including method of skull base repair, although the use of a vascularized nasoseptal flap did trend toward a reduced CSF leak rate. CSF protein is the most sensitive marker for the presumptive diagnosis and timely treatment of meningitis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The taboo of avoiding nonsteroidal anti‐inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) after functional endoscopic sinus surgery (FESS) has been waning. The impetus to reduce opioid prescriptions in view of the opioid epidemic led the authors to change their practices to include NSAIDs after sinus surgery. This study's aim was to analyze the differences between patients before and after we began recommending NSAIDs after FESS. Methods: A prospective cohort study was performed on patients undergoing FESS or other endoscopic nasal surgeries at 3 institutions, by 5 rhinologists and 1 facial plastic surgeon. Before introducing NSAIDs, all patients were given a prescription for hydrocodone‐acetaminophen 5/325 mg and also recommended preferentially to use acetaminophen 325 mg. After the addition of NSAIDs, ibuprofen 200 mg and acetaminophen 325 mg were recommended preferentially, using the narcotic as a rescue medication. Patients kept a pain diary and medication log, and gave a visual analog scale (VAS) score for overall pain. Demographics, surgical variables, and comorbidities were also analyzed. Results: One hundred sixty‐six total patients were recruited and had data that could be analyzed (65 without NSAIDs, 101 with NSAIDs). Overall, mean pain VAS score was 3.12 ± 1.95 for the non‐NSAID group and 2.33 ± 2.30 for the NSAID group (p value = 0.006). The day with the highest mean pain was the first postoperative day. The mean number of total opioid pills taken was 6.94 ± 6.85 without NSAIDs vs 3.77 ± 4.56 with NSAIDs (p = 0.018). Age and gender were found to be the only consistently significant patient variables to affect pain. There were no bleeding complications. Conclusion: NSAID use was introduced into the practices of 5 practicing rhinologists and 1 facial plastic surgeon. No bleeding complications were seen. Both pain and overall opioid usage were reduced significantly. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: A novel, bioabsorbable, fibrinogen-based implant has been developed as a mucosal dressing after endoscopic sinus surgery (ESS). This implant can be formulated with fluticasone propionate (FP) for local elution of corticosteroid to reduce postoperative inflammation and promote mucosal healing. Objective: This study investigated the biocompatibility and pharmacokinetics of the implant in a rabbit model. Methods: Implants with and without FP were placed on both intact and demucosalized maxillary sinuses of 33 New Zealand White rabbits. Sinuses with either intact or denuded bone without implants acted as controls. Histopathologic assessments were carried out at 5, 15, and 28 days. Concentrations of FP in the maxillary sinus mucosa, nasal cavity mucosa, and plasma were measured for up to 44 days. Results: Implants placed on intact mucosa or denuded bone were grossly integrated within 15 days. Minimal foreign body reaction was seen with negligible differences for inflammation, fibrosis, or bone remodeling among controls, sinuses with the implant, or sinuses with the implant plus FP, at all time points. All samples also showed complete or near-complete percentage reepithelialization at 28 days, although the denuded bone controls demonstrated greater percentage reepithelialization at 5 days compared with denuded bone with the implant or implant plus FP (p < 0.0001). The maxillary sinus mucosa demonstrated levels of FP of >140 ng/g up to 44 days. Plasma concentrations of FP were generally very low and were undetectable after day 7. Conclusions: The implant and the implant plus FP seemed to be biocompatible in rabbits. The implant plus FP effectively eluted steroid locally over at least 44 days, with negligible plasma concentrations. Further studies are warranted regarding potential therapeutic applications in patients undergoing ESS for chronic rhinosinusitis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]